 |
|
|
|
|
September 29th, 2011
11:09 AM ET
My Take: 'Hate' is too big a word to be used with such little restraint
By Jim Daly, Special to CNN (CNN)– We all know the old saying about falsely yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. It's a metaphor designed to explain that while free speech is protected in our country, speaking with reckless disregard for the truth and inciting panic is, at best, irresponsibly dangerous, and, at worst, beyond the covering of the First Amendment. The phrase has its roots in a 1919 opinion by Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, but there's a version of it growing increasingly common today: Falsely yelling "hate" in a crowded public square. A New York Times story over the weekend chronicled how some individuals and organizations eager to see same-sex marriage legalized have stopped trying to win others to their point of view through reasoned argument and have turned, instead, to emotional epithets as their main rhetorical tool. The most recent campaign is against the Charity Give Back Group (CGBG), an online shopping service that allows consumers to donate a portion of their purchase from a variety of retailers to the nonprofit group of their choice. Gay activists, primarily through online petitions, have pressured several retailers to pull out of CGBG, alleging that the stores are helping fund "hate." Similar efforts have been launched in recent months against Blake Mycoskie, founder of TOMS shoes, for speaking at a Focus on the Family event; and Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks, for agreeing to appear at a leadership conference sponsored by another Christian group, the Willow Creek Association. These events are a chilling snapshot of what's become of civil discourse in our culture. The simple truth is, "hate" is far too big a word to be thrown around with such little discretion. It imputes a sinister motive to what, in this case, is a widely and deeply held belief that God's design for human sexuality lies within the lifelong context of one-man, one-woman marriage. Does Focus on the Family advocate for that definition of marriage to be upheld as the law of the land? Unapologetically. But do we, as Webster's defines "hate," feel "intense hostility and aversion" to gays and lesbians? Do we regard them with "extreme dislike or antipathy"? Unequivocally not. That is not to say, of course, that there aren't people and groups who do "hate" gays and lesbians. There are also people and groups who "hate" Christians. But they do not represent the wide swath of either side of the discussion about same-sex marriage. For the overwhelming majority of those who see the issue as we do, it is a public-policy matter we approach informed by our faith and motivated by what we feel is best for society. Study after study has indicated the best environment for children to be raised and nurtured is the home of their married, biological parents. Same-sex marriage, by definition, creates homes that deprive a child of either a mother or a father. Those of us who hold these views on homosexuality and same-sex marriage are certainly accustomed to having our beliefs challenged, even vehemently, and often in our own families. We pray we speak on these subjects in a way that upholds God's truth while demonstrating Christ's heart and love for all people. However, if this effort to intimidate those who hold our views - and even those who may not hold our views but associate with us - continues, it's possible we won't be able to speak about it at all. In many ways the environment we find ourselves in is not unlike that surrounding Sen. Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s. Certainly at that point in our history, the threat of communism to our nation was real. It was right and proper, as most on the left and right agree, that those who did seek to subvert the laws and security of the United States be exposed and brought to justice. But the way McCarthy pursued his anti-communism campaign was, as the Times said in a 1998 editorial, "a menace to the body politic." He leveled very loud charges very publicly, often with no evidence to support his accusations. Still, the smears stuck even to those he targeted unfairly, who for the rest of their lives bore a stain not caused by their actions, but by his words. We were a better country than that then, and we're a better country than that now. Ours is a long tradition of turning disagreements into debates, not denigration. Let's keep that tradition going by putting out a real fire – the one caused by overheated, overreaching rhetoric.
Next entry »Archbishop who eulogized John Kennedy dies
« Previous entryU.S. condemns Iranian pastor's conviction
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
Editor's Note: Jim Daly is president of 
I am not an author nor a columnist nor a public writer (well, I guess I am since I'm writing here), but if I were, I would have written an article similar to this one eons ago. I agree that just because you don't support a belief, an agenda, a following, a fad/trend, a movement and even a certain type of conduct, it does not mean that one is a hater nor has any hate at all in their heart. In fact, there are some of us, not all, but some of US that have a deep love and compassion for the groups or individuals we don't agree with.
In all honesty, what I really question is the motivation behind the individuals from said groups that call and single out the "haters". I question their motivation to accuse others of hate and more than that, I question what's in their heart. No offense but sometimes these groups and organizations remind me of the muslim extremists, that if you don't support their agenda, you're an 'infidel' ('hater' in our terminology). I do realize that individuals pertaining to gay/lesbian groups have been attacked either emotionally or physically...something I am totally against, but the same can be said about Christians having haters...and there are plenty of them. Just read some of the other Belief Blog articles in here. If I weren't as convicted as I am in my Christian faith, reading the comments here would have scared me to death.
But really, not every opposition is coming from a hating heart.
@BoldGeorge - I actually agree with you ... with all due respect to Rev. Foster. There are fellow Christians in my own congregation who oppose same-gen.der marriage, and question the ability of same-gender couples to provide a good home, and who believe they live in an inherently unhealthy life.style (emotionally, physic.ally, and spiritually). And I know they do this based on sincere beliefs and sincere concern for those in the LG.BT community, and are not motivated by hate.
(cont.) I think for the most part their beliefs come out of igno.rance,
(continued.) ... and a diffi.culty in letting go of bia.sed atti.tudes they picked up in the dist.ant past ...
(cont.) ... which is why their numbers are rapidly dwin.dling as they are confronted with the realities of the same-gen.der couples they are getting to know first hand. But in the meantime, consider what LG.BT folks are hearing from these sincere, caring Christians. You are an abom.ination ... you will go to he.ll if you don't change ... your relationship with your part.ner is not real love ... you and your part.ner aren't capable of being as good parents as straight people ... you don't deserve the kinds of legal protections that would allow you to visit your part.ner in the hospital, or garner social-security benefits should they die ... you don't deserve the same kinds of legal protections that straight couples get ... etc.. These folks are not just pushing an agenda. They are dealing with the fact that so many people – including some sincere, caring Christians – are working hard to deny them tangible rights and benefits, deme.aning their families (and yes, all this has a negative impact on their kids as well), in large part by using distortions and outright falsehoods. It is hard for me to imagine, since I'm a fairly old, straight, married guy, but I'd guess it is a little hard to be on the receiving end of all that and feel that hate isn't somehow involved. Certainly the negative effects on their lives, and the lives of their children, wouldn't be a whole lot different if hate really was the motivation.
(Sorry for having to break up my last post, but CNN's word-blocker seemed to have a problem with the word "atti.tude" and this was the only way to find the problem. (Pretty dumb work-checker.)
The worst offenders are religious fools.
They hate anyone who's not of their religion.
Seriously why did religion make out their god to be so vengeful and hateful?
Religious people are such hypocrites, they are surely here to make normal people laugh.
It's people like you spreading hate that keep slowing down progress for the rest of society.
Sentor McCarthy made many loud public threats against a whole assortment of humanity whom he did not like or found threatening. Similarly, you claim "study after study" has proven a result you already held. What studies? Cite them, put them along side the study by Nanette Gartrell and Henry Bos which found in 2010 that the children lesbian parents "scored higher than kids in straight families on some psychological measures of self-esteem and confidence, did better academically and were less likely to have behavioral problems, such as rule-breaking and aggression." http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1994480,00.html
Your standard of using a biblical witness to dictate public policy is troubling as well. As a Lutheran, we have a stong tradition of interperting scripture and bringing the best of science, reason and public conversation to bear on our understanding of how God continues to speak to us today. But, read in a proof text manner, finding those verses and ripping them out of the larger narriative to prove my pre-existing point, has a shameful history in our country. Christians used scripture to justify slavery. Christians used scripture to justify and futher Jim Crow and the miscegenation laws of the past. Christians use scripture to justify why husbands could beat their wife and the wife should just take it. The bible, used as a tool to prove our pre-existing points, becomes a blunt object used to beat others who are different from us.
As a devout, orthodox Christian and Jesus freak, I do not think using the word "Hate" to describe what you and people from Focus on the Family and other organizations are trying to do is too strong. 1 John 4:20 puts it this way:"Those who say, ‘I love God’, and hate their brothers or sisters, are liars."
You do hate gay people. You just hate to admit it.
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1994480,00.html#ixzz1ZRMM22Ba
@kimsland - being an anti-religious bigot is not any better than being an anti-gay bigot. I live in NJ, where the largest civil-rights organization in the state is the gay-rights group Garden State Equality. A disproportionately-high percentage of their rather large board of directors (~20%) are clergy, and I know many more are people of faith. I went to a retirement celebration for one of their vice-chairman not long ago - a partnered gay pastor who has been with his partner for over 20 years - and it was attended by many current and former state officials included former governor Jon Corzine. People of faith have an extremely high profile in my state when it comes to fighting for civil rights in general, and gay rights in particular. (From what I've seen, the situation is similar in other states.) If you were to show up at a GSE meeting hoping to help the cause, and you started spouting broad-brush statements about how religious people are hypocrites, I'm pretty sure you'd be shown the door so fast it would make your head spin. You can't fight bigotry with more bigotry.
Certain religious people tend to hate people not of their religion and certain non-believers tend to hate people of ANY religion. See the problem, Kimsland?
"certain non-believers tend to hate people of ANY religion. "
That's not true, I don't hate all religions – I hate blatant stupidity because someone is too incompetent to do research on a subject before they start spewing their own version of hatred not based on facts.
The worst offenders are liberals and atheists (I suppose they are liberal too). Pennsylvania Avenue Barry uses the racist label all the time. He and his AG are two of the utmost racists. A liberal school teacher called a school board member a Nazi. That word is cast about frequently and is facist. The left does not consider it offensive to call people red necks or hillbillies. They speak of Christians in demeaning teams - women too. Women ARE liberals and yet the liberals hate them. and call them hate words. It is tiring and it is cheap.
Are the people Barry is calling racist acting racist? What about that school board member you mentioned? Was he, perhaps, acting a bit like a Nazi? Just because a label is occasionally abused doesn't mean it never applies. That last part of your post confuses me. Are you saying that all women are liberals?
Liberals hate women? But women are liberals? Women hate themselves? This byzantine logic perplexes me!
your comment wreaks of delusion
im not a liberal by any stretch
but i hate reilgion
how am i any kind of offender
you dont see me picketing on the streets like that baptist church you go to that marches against funerals
@ THE BROWN NOTE
I hate to break it to you but not all Christians are baptist (or catholic or Anglican or Presbyterian etc). You atheists tell Christians to get our facts straight however you cannot even write a simplistic, inarticulate sentence without uttering a blatant lie. Excuse me if I have made any grammatical errors but I am only 14 years of age and still have at least another 4 years of english classes ahead of me. The only reason I judged your grammar is the fact that it is atrocious (regardless of your age).
The Focus on the Family group is "giving false witness"! Do they have "extreme dislike or antipathy" against LGBT? I'd say unequivocally Yes! Do they want open discourse with gays? No, would be a safe guess! If they & their sister organizations are campaigning against the gay populace, why be surprised over a backlash! It's a normal progression! You call me names, I defend myself! Also, they are not the underdog Daly wants to present them to be! Underhanded? Yep! Is that what the Good Book teaches??
FAITH IN GOD WILL TURN THIS COUNTRY AROUND SO WHOEVER TRIES TO MOCK GOD LOOOK OUT! THE REASON FOR THE ANTAGGANISTICT BS ON THIS BLOG IS BECAUSE HE'S RETURNING WITH A VENGENCE THEN YOU HIPPACRITS WILL HAVE NO WHERE TO HIDE!
You might want to invest in a spell check program.
I think that was the first draft of Revelation
Faith in God may turn an individual around but turning around is a one-at-a-time choice. God said "my kingdom is not of this world" and the Romans and the barbaric hordes did as they pleased and still do. God will not intervene.
frank
thanks for the laugh
Right turn.. god did nothing be cause he is not real..just as he did nothing when Christians burned witches at the stake,the Roman Catholics roaming Europe slaughtering "Heretics" the ancients sacrificing virgins and countless poor critters, Muslims blowing them selves and others to bits, non believers doing horrible things ..god appears to be an equal opportunity ignorer ..
right on dna
christians think god will answer their prayers when mom or dad gets cancer
but god obviously didnt care about christians killing people
Where is his peer reviewed citations? Most commentators use them.
Not the ones that don't rely on outdated ideas like "evidence" or "honesty".
The hate speech displayed by the vast majority of these pro-gay posts is mind-boggling.
Care to provide examples? I'm curious to know the difference between "hate-speech" and standing up for an oppressed minority.
Oh, and please ignore the obvious trolls, like *frank* (right below this post)
I'm not "trolling" at all; my contempt and abhorrence for that sick belief system is quite honest and well-considered, and I'm just stating that I hate it.
Anne what gives you the right though, to be anti gay? Christianity ? ideas based on an unproven, ancient text...what exactly is the problem you have with gay people? is it just god or a real reason?
The Christians are EARNING their names by trying to oppress millions of our citizens. Yet the Christians are free to practice their insanity in public and even expect praise for their supersti.tious beliefs.
Guess wha?t I support your right to be silly. Why don't you support the rights of others that you do not agree with?
THAT is why you are held in utter contempt by so many. You want to force others to follow YOUR belief system.
Stop doing that and you'll stop hearing the anger.
If there was a way to get wattage out of my hatred for Christianity, I'd never have to pay a utility bill again.
I'm an atheist who works at a research insti.tute and owns a small dog named Ted.
See? I can make statements with no bearing on this discussion, too!
I have six dogs!
I like dogs.
i have two dogs
and they too hate religion
I have two dogs as well. They don't hate religion. They are golden retrievers and cannot hate anything. My dogs more Christian than 99% of Christians.
So, according to Focus on the Family it is right to force one's own religious dogma onto the larger secular society. They can sugar coat it however they like, but that is what they do. They believe the Bible is the word of God and that their interpretation of it is the only one that counts. And because they know they are right, they are justified in forcing their views onto everyone else. They should ask themselves if it is OK to deny another citizen the right to visit a loved one in the hospital, or to make life and death decisions for that loved one, or if it is OK to deny medical coverege to a citizen who doesn't meeet their definition of "spouse." Are those things OK? We tried seperate but equal already in this country and it was a monsterous failure, yet that is what groups like this are seeking.
And another thing....the science is pretty clear that ho-mo-se-xuality is a normal aspect of a great many mammals, including humans. Further, there are just as many stidies that show no adverse effects to children raised by same-se*x parents, except for bigotry coming from people who don't like what they represent.
And while I support every person's right to believe what they want so long as they don't directly harm anyone else or force their views onto the general public, I have to say that these folks are basing their belief on a collection of stories based on older stories told by people who had no idea what was beyond that mountain over yonder, let alone have the foggiest idea about biology, chemistry, geology, genetics, etc.
Bottom line, all citizens of this country have the right to live their lives as they see fit, so long as they don't directly harm any other citizen. That is what a free society is all about.
Nice try Daly. So, "hate" isn't the right word? Let's try a more fitting one shall we? Bigot? Yeah, that work's nicely. Your religion dictates one man and one woman, fortunately for us, we live in a nation that not only has freedom OF religion, but freedom FROM religion. Your religion does not dictate the laws of this nation, Thanks 1st Amendment! Judging from your article, you're clearly not a fan of that one.
If your God exists, he created people, all people, including those who are gay. Who are you to denounce or take liberties away from God's creations? Hom-ose-xulaity exists in nature, not just in people, but animals as well. It's naturally occurring. These people should have every right we do. If your religion refuses to perform a marriage for them, that's your right, but it is NOT your right to try and get the government to do so as well.
Grow up.
He Hate Me
I am an old guy and I think it is vile the way h-a-t-e words are bandied about. The Liberals are the worst offenders right up to Pennsylvania Avenue. Everyone who disagrees are called "ra-ci-st" and "Na-zi" and other vile things (the other day a school teacher called a school board member (his union protects him).(why I lost a lot of respect for teachers). I think it is h-a-t-e to pain rural whites as "red neck" and "hill billies" .. all derogatory labeling is sick. We should not h-a-t-e anybody and it is not our job to judge anybody. We are to attend to our own failings and not to the failings of others. But not even as Christians but merely a neighbors and counrtymen we should be a lot more respectful.
And anyone who disagrees with believers is just as likely to be called a Christian hater. It works both ways, right?
Now, I'll ask you the same questions I asked Fidei Coticula Crux below: Are you amongst the Christians who believe that Jews will go to Hell if they do not convert? Seeing that it's their God that supposedly will be doing this to them, how is that not another example of expressed 'hatred?'
I don't have any problem saying I *hate* religion. Love the religious though. :^))
They like to see any and all criticism of their beliefs as 'hatred' towards them, but as Elbert Hubbard said
“The final proof of greatness lies in being able to endure criticism without resentment.”
🙂
Does anyone remember the article here called: 'Victoria Jackson blasts ‘Glee,’ gays while waving Bible'?
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/22/victoria-jackson-blasts-‘glee’-gays-while-waving-bible/
Tell me, as a woman who exemplifies much of the actual att.itude we see coming from conservative people of faith, does she look like she was "demonstrating Christ's heart and love" with that?
I really like how the summary of this article is, essentially:
"Just because we want to act like a hate-group doesn't mean we like being called one!"
If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men.
Even the ones making that impossible for others? Sometimes it's worth it to fight back.
Even God, apparently, is not at peace with all men (mankind), else what is the need for hell?
@Nonimus,
The reason for hell is because not all men are at peace with God. God has always been willing to be at peace with his creation.
Fidei Coticula Crux
Are you amongst the Christians who believe that Jews will go to Hell if they do not convert? Seeing that it's their God that supposedly will be doing this to them, how is that not another example of expressed 'hatred?'
Free,
I'm not the one that makes that decision... so why does it matter what I believe?
Fidei Coticula Crux
So God decides, right? Then what gives anyone the right to speak as though they know what God will decide? Scriptural interpretation? Well, that's actually up to debate, since believers of all stripes as well as nonbelievers each have their own opinion.
Some Christians consider God to be more important to them than their own mothers, and consider any opinion that he isn't the loving father they believe him to be a personal insult. So, if Jews feel as strongly about their being God's children, then Christian insistence that they are not is just as insulting, see? Same goes for gays who don't consider what they are as being sinful. Lots of them also believe that God loves them just the way they are, the way he created them. Stating that their God considers them evil is then just as hateful. So, you see, you really do have to take people's beliefs into consideration when you claim to know whom God considers not his children.
Free,
I’ll tell you what I believe… I believe you are trying put words in my mouth. How do you get what all you just said out of my first comment: “If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men.” What you are doing, I believe, is what is known as “flaming” in the blogging world.
@Fidei
No buddy, he's having an "argument" or "discussion" with you. You know, that thing where one person makes a point, and then the other, and it goes back and forth? Tough distinction, I know. The tricky part here is that, although he wouldn't have been able to get all that from your FIRST post, all those other ones after it sure provided some useful fodder.
Fidei Coticula
AmazingSteve is right, all I want is to debate, or at least have a conversation. It wasn't your first post I was commenting on anyway, but your remark to Nonimus noting that hell was created for those not at peace with God. My point was that many Christians believe that Jews are going to Hell just for following the religion that God himself supposedly laid out for them, which appears to be yet another rather hateful thing for them to say. Sorry if the turn this conversation took upsets you, but it is what it is.
The level of hypocrisy in this short article boggles my mind. He keeps missing one small but glaring fact: the faith he's interpreting himself to be part of believes it can and should make decisions on what's right for *everyone*, not just people who hold that faith. How hard do you have to delude yourself to not see how *arrogant* that is? The family structure he touts as preferable? Barely exists anymore, with a 50% divorce rate. Many kids grow up in fractured and/or single parent homes. And the irony of the McCarthy anecdote kills me. It's not the gay community that's McCarthy in this picture, you fools; it's his 'faith'. Trying to hold back the 'communists'. No wonder people use the word 'hate'; it *feels* like hate.
I wish this guy was just a troll, but, terrifyingly...he's not. He's really that delusional.
God save us from people thinking they're doing God's work.
Exactly
Let's not forget that the argument that Daly is imposing his views on everyone goes both ways. The issue isn't about legislating morality (because all laws do to some extent), but whose morality. This is why I believe that the only way to be fair to everyone is for the government to get out of the business of legislating "marriages" in the first place.
Unfortunately, government can't be entirely aloof to the issue of marriage, as there are recognized legal rights that spouses have that others don't have.
Focus on the family? Of course but don't complicate said families with the supersti-tions of religions. ================
To wit:
Reiterating the obvious:
Recognizing the supersti-tions, flaws, follies and frauds in the foundations of Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Paganism, and Christianity by the "hatters", "bowers", kneelers" and "pew peasants" will quickly converge these religions into some simple rules of life. No koran, bible, clerics, nuns, monks, imams, evangelicals, ayatollahs, rabbis, professors of religion or priests needed or desired.
Ditto for houses of "worthless worship" aka mosques, churches, basilicas, cathedrals, temples or synagogues.
plz hit report abuse on all reality posts
@J W There are a number of stories in the Bible of bigamy but you failed to mention that there as also a lot of trouble that was recorded because of bigamy. In most of the recorded stories of bigamy jealousy rasied it's ugly head.
Wasn't there also a lot of trouble because of obedience to God? Wars, genocides, killings, etc.
I'd urge the author and anyone else taking this view to review the facts. Organizations are designated as hate groups not because they are christian or because they believe in one-man, one-woman marriage, but because they SPREAD KNOWN FALSEHOODS about gay people in order to accomplish their goals. The FRC was designated a hate group for continually pushing the widely debunked idea that gay and lesbians have shorter life spans and that they are more likely to molest children, neither of which are true. Their actions in spreading these lies is indeed sinister in nature and intended to incite animosity and hatred against gays and lesbians.
I agree, but exactly who gets to decide what is a hate group?
You say they were. By the government, like they do with terrorists?
Or is it just one side branding the other as hateful
Falsehood as defined by who??? You or the Bible's? I choose to use the Bible instead of a random definition made up by someone who works for Webster.
The author mentions "Study after study" which he says proves that same-se.x couples make inferior parents. Is this a lie in your opinion, or not?
Oh the irony del..."I choose to believe the bible rather than a random definition made up by webster." You choose to believe a random book of stories...and here's the key...MADE UP...by bronze age shepards. On balance, I'll go with the person who works at webster. At least he/she was born in the last 100 years and has about 15 years more education than the authors of your...once again...MADE UP book.
Free – it is a lie – it's a lie by omission and misdirection. The choice for most of the abandoned children in the world is not 2 straight parents vs. 2 gay parents....it's No parents/1 parent/Foster parents/orphanage vs. 2 gay parents. Besides, what studies? And by studies I mean real, scientific studies. Not Focus on the Family sponsored BS.